meta-question questions

ws-caf message

As Eric pointed out in the summary of issues list that we discussed on the conf call, several of the open issues I submitted are phrased mostly as questions. For example, 136 asks various questions about nested-contexts and begin. It was suggested that these issues might be resolved without any change to the text.

a) a particular question is already answered in the text, and I failed to notice or infer the answer

If case a) applies, then it should be very quick for someone who knows to point out the answer in the current draft. There may then be an edtiorial question of whether it should be clarified, so others don't fall down the same hole.

If case b), then we would be agreeing that we will be proposing a Committee Draft that is deliberately ambiguous or incomplete.

So, if you think the answers to any of the questions are "obvious", please save us time next week by pointing out where they are answered in 0.3.

If they aren't answerable from 0.3, then we need to find answers (which could be removal from the base ws-context spec of the construct they refer to).

(I am well aware, from my own experience, that the editors of a document sometimes are less sure of what is in it than the readers - the editors can remember all the things that might have been in it over its history, and may not remember what the answer was to some long-ago discussion, especially if it got revisited in different circles. So please make sure you are referring to what is actually in the current text. And please accept my apologies for any apparent arrogance in this paragraph :-)

------------------------------------------
Peter Furniss
Chief Scientist, Choreology Ltd
web: http://www.choreology.com
email: peter.furniss@choreology.com
phone: +44 870 739 0066
mobile: +44 7951 536168